tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC January 26, 2018 5:00pm-6:00pm PST
>> tonight on all in. >> mr. president, did you seek to fire robert mueller. >> fake news, folks. >> the plot to fire mueller. >> typical "new york times" fake stories. >> tonight new concerns the threat to the special counsel hasn't passed. and yet, one republican is backing off his plan to protect robert mueller and what all this means for the russia investigation. >> i haven't given it any thought. >> then. >> yeah, maybe donald trump wanted to fire the special counsel for conflict. does he not have the right to raise those questions. >> can trump tv sustain the president through his latest crisis. >> the president says it's fake news. what do you think? do you even care? >> the finance chief for the republican party faces new allegations of sexual misconduct. >> steve has always got advice. >> when all-in starts right now. >> his advice i like to listen to. >> good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes.
the president just landed back in washington from his trip to davos. he returns to yet more questions about his actions toward special counsel robert mueller's investigation. the president was attending the world economic forum where he got to rub elbows with the globalist elite. the only thing on reporters minds at davos was the block buster report by "the new york times" the president ordered robert mueller to be fired last june backing off only after his white house counsel threatened to quit. this morning the president gab them a classic trumpian nondenial. >> mr. president, did you seek to fire mueller? >> fake news, folks, fake news. >> what's your message today? >> typical "new york times" fake stories. >> back in august amid ongoing rumors the president would make a move against mueller, he denied the idea had even occurred to him. >> i haven't given it any thought. i've been read about it from you people. i'm not dismissing anybody. i want them to get on with the task. i also want the senate and the
house to come out with their findings. >> but tonight, "the new york times" report has been confirmed by multiple outputs, nbc news, "washington post," politico, even trump tv. neither the white house nor anyone else named has issue aid formal denial. according to the "times," the president wavered for months whether he wants to fire mueller which is an omnipresent concern among his legal team and close aides. in other words, they are still worried he might do it. and this revelation adds to what was already an extraordinary pattern of behavior by the president of the united states who, of course is the subject of an ongoing investigation into whether he or his campaign conspired with a foreign add ser vary to criminally influence the 2016 election. at every turn, the president has sought to control, impede or end that very investigation. a year ago, you'll remember he asked then fbi director james comey for his loyalty in a private meeting according to comey's sworn testimony and then
subsequently, asked comey to drop the investigation of michael flynn. when comey did not comply, the president got his justice department to come up with a bogus excuse for firing the fbi director, blaming it on his handling of the clinton e-mail probe. then the president turned around and admitted he fired comey because of the russia investigation. >> regardless of recommendation, i was going to fire comey. knowing there was no good time to do it. and in fact, when i decided to just do it, i said to myself, i said you know, this russia thing with trump and russia is a madeup story. it's an excuse. >> before firing comey, the president asked his top intelligence officials to intervene with copy on the russia probe on trump's behalf. he later pressured senior republicans to end the senate intelligence committee's russia inquiry, pressured his attorney general not to recuse himself from supering the justice department's investigation. when sessions recused himself,
the president threatened to fire him berating him publicly. the president asked james comey's successor, andrew mccabe who obviously he voted for in the 2016 election and after he was replaced as director by chris wray, president pressured wray through sessions to fire him all together. it was only because someone threatened to quit the president did not succeed. all those actions, that entire pattern of behavior we just described was simply in trump's mind "fighting back." >> do you think robert mueller will be fair to you in the larger investigation? >> we're going to find out. >> are you concerned about that. >> here's what they'll say. and everybody says. no collusion. there's no collusion. now they're saying oh, well, did he fight back. did he fight back? >> what is collusion. >> john, you fight back. oh, it's obstruction. so here's the thing. i hope so. >> today, the top democrat in
the senate intelligence committee senator mark warner expressed concerns about the president's view of the american legal system. >> what bothers me so much is i don't know if the president understands our system. understands that everybody has got to adhere to the law and when you've got a prosecutor looking into a matter, you've got to let that prosecutor finish his work. this president has copied to say there's no there there. well, he is acting in absolutely the opposite way of someone who obviously had nothing to hide. >> senator richard blume. that will is a democrat from connecticut, member of the senate judiciary committee. i'll start with the comments by senator warner. do you agree he's acting as someone who obviously has something to hide? >> he is acting as though he has thing to hide he's also acting like someone who obviously has utter contempt for the rule of law. he has a right to fight back if he means the right to present
arguments and evidence and a lee defense. he has no right to fire jim comey or bob mueller. he's already fired comey. he says because the russia thing is nothing. but in fact, if he fires mueller because he similarly wants to stop an investigation or intimidate witnesses or withhold documents, that's obstruction of justice and the excellent summary that you've just given makes for a credible case of obstruction of justice against the president of the united states. >> so if that's true, then what? i guess the question is what more, given what we already know, what more do you need to know? >> the first point we need to know is that this investigation will be permitted to conclude with completeness and integrity. that's why we need the bipartisan legislation that i and others have introduced that will stop the president from firing robert mueller and
protect the integrity and independence of that investigation. that's point number one. second, we need to have all of the evidence subpoenaed and produced. not only to the special counsel but also to the judiciary committee including donald trump and jared kushner in their account of the june meetings that occurred. but most important, the president has to be sent the message that there will be a firestorm that republicans and democrats will join together in the kind of reaction that followed the saturday night massacre during watergate when there was a joint sense of outrage. best way to send that message is through the special counsel protection legislation that i and others have introduced. >> you have cosponsors, republican cosponsors on that. who obviously are they? if you can tell me. >> they are senators graham antilles on the republican side,
senators koons and senator whitehouse and booker booker on our side. there's growing momentum as a result of that remarkable report last night. i think by the way, this continued excellence in reporting is another sign that the heroes of this era will be the free press and the independent judiciary. >> but here's. >> very significantly, senator grassley indicated ha he was open to considering this legislation, as well. >> here's the thing. it seems that some republicans have moved in the opposite direction. tom tillis is a cois spencer. he says his bill isn't urgent even after news trump tried to fire mueller. he's seeksly backing off it. it's not going to pass. we've been talking about this legislation on this program for several months now with no seeming urgency from say the majority leader mitch mcconnell to bring it up for a vote. >> that's very true, chris. you're right.
i'm disappointed in a number of my republican colleagues who obviously have failed to sense the urgency of this legislation and who obviously have been silent over the last 24 hours after this extraordinary chilling, stunning, deeply scary report about the president acting, not just thinking, but acting to fire the special counsel. i am hoping that senator grassley's statement that he's open to considering this legislation and that there should be no firing will prompt others to follow his lead. >> senator richard blumenthal, thanks for your time tonight. >> thank you. >> for more on the fallout from this, i'm joined by richard painter ethics lawyer and retired federal judge nancy curtner. nancy, let me begin with you. it seems to me that this is going to end up in some court somewhere somehow that there's no way the process just develops without some federal could yours having to weigh in on where the
boundaries are here. is that your sense, as well as someone who was once a federal judge? >> well, the problem here is, of course, because we're talking about obstruction of justice vis-a-vis a president, you're talking about an impeachment proceeding. and that's where the line between politics and law get muddied. in other words, there won't be an obstruction of justice charge against the president by way of indictment. so essentially the house of representatives, the senate can define what obstruction of justice is and are not necessarily even bound by the legal definition of it. so what will be in court will be subpoenas, scope of the investigation, et cetera. but the core accusations will be political. >> richard, this is something that was in the "new york times" story that i thought was interesting. to some extent i think the fact of the leaking is almost the most significant -- this is politico. i think the fact of the leaking is almost the most significant that we've reached a point where
people at the center of things feel the need to redeem themselves at the expense of the president. what do you make of that as someone who obviously worked in the white house? >> i don't know who was leaking. a lot of people are leaking in this white house because president trump throws his own people under the bus with regularity and people don't last long at this white house. but this concern that president trump's going to try and fire robert mueller is a real one. people in the white house are well aware of it. and this is a reiteration of the exact same story that we have known about all along. i can say that if president trump chooses to fire robert mueller, there's a very high chance he's going to be removed from office. republicans are not going to tolerate much more of this. they have to go into the 2018 elections and suffer the consequences of trump's conduct and their own failure to rein it in. and there's only so much they're going to put up with.
and president trump himself could end up being prosecuted and going to jail. this is serious. when you fire a special counsel in order to impede an investigation, he's already fired james comey, he has the power to hire and fire just like the mayor of a town may have the power to hire and fire the chief of police but if the chief of police stops the mayor for speeding, and the mayor says you're fired, the city council is going to be meeting by the end of the week and thinking about what to do with the mayor. and that's the difference. it's the difference between the power to do something and the legal right, in this country, he can't do that. that point's got to be made very clear to him one way or the other. >> nancy. >> go ahead, please. >> i was saying when you talk about what's going on in court and what's not going to be in court, the people around trump, the circle around trump who obviously may be aiding his obstruction of justice, those people are vulnerable to criminal charges. so that may well have been going
through mcgahn's mind when he was deciding he didn't want to be complicity in this. those are the people that are vulnerable. >> and that was something that happened in watergate is people were charged around the president prior to the president being brought up. what do you think about the idea of the facts we have adding up to a plausible claim of obstruction on the face? >> you know, i step back from this and think about what i would do if i were the judge in the case. one measure of obstruction of justice is there a pattern of conduct here. well, there's a pattern of conduct with respect to comey. now close to mueller. there's a pattern of interference with the investigation, what he said to comey, what he said to coats, the national security adviser, what he says to sessions is a pattern of conduct. there's inconsistent versions of what's going on, inconsistent accounts. that connotes somebody trying to do something he shouldn't do. there's a pattern of conduct. but you know, it's interesting,
mueller is quite right not wanting -- he wants to get to the bottom of this and not bringing charges until all the ducks are in a row. it is an enormous thing to make this accusation against a president and i think he wants to do it, he wants there to be, if there's anything with respect to the russian investigation, he wants those charges. if there's anything with respect to money laundering, he wants that. the best play here, the best charge here would be to obstruction of justice alongside other accusations. >> that is something a lot of people are talking about, what would happen if that was done in the absence of findings of criminal infraction on the underlying questions. my question to you, richard, is the defenders of the president will say something like the following, the president is frustrated and angry at what he views as fundamentally an unjust inquiry and so therefore, he is "fighting back," in his words. what do you say to that. >> this president is unable to be control his frustration and
anger. and that's a psychological problem. it's a very karngs one when he's in control of nuclear weapons because there is a lot to be frustrated about in the presidency. whether it's this investigation or -- the free press is not always going to be complementary of the president of the united states. so his frustration and his anger is leading him to do irrational things here to tread certainly very close to the edge if not over the edge with respect to criminal obstruction of justice. we've seen his tweets. this is not a good situation, not the behavior of a stable man. >> richard painter and nancy gertner, i thank you both. up next, watch in realtime the lengths trump tv went to to try to spin the report that the president ordered the firing of robert mueller reporting they themselves confirmed.
can the network save the president in two minutes. i see it in their eyes. it happens when people connect with nature, with culture, with each other. day after day i'm the first to see change. to see people go out, and come back new. princess cruises. the best premium cruise line. 7-day caribbean cruises from $599. get ready for centrum micro-workouts. the bottle curl. the twist n' turn. the stretch n' grab. the gummy squish. centrum micronutrients fuel your body from the inside out. grab a centrum and join in. repeat daily.
it has been a remarkable 24 hours over at trump tv. last time no, times broke the news in june, president trump ordered his white house counsel don mcgahn to fire special counsel robert mueller but then backed down after mcgahn threatened to quit. because the story broke shortly before his show, the president's chief propagandist had to scramble to figure out how to cover it which led to a hilarious reversal in less than an hour. first he dismissed the story but after finding his network confirmed parts of it, he changed course. the story may be true, so what. it doesn't matter before abruptly throwing to a car crash from the day before. >> at this hour, "the new york times" is trying to distract you. they have a story trump wanted mueller fired sometime last june and our sources and i've checked in with many of them are not confirming that tonight
president's attorney dismisses the story and says, no, no comment. we're not going there. how many times has "the new york times" and others gotten it wrong? all right. so we have sources tonight just confirming to ed henry yeah, maybe donald trump wanted to fire the special counsel for conflict. does he not have the right to raise those questions? you know, we'll deal with this tomorrow night. we have a shocking video to bring you from arizona. >> so that was last night. then this morning, the host of the president's other favorite cable news show pointed to the president causing the story fake news and then told viewers they shouldn't care about it today. >> there's a big story that apparently the president of the united states last june wanted to fire robert mueller. >> the president says it's fake news. that happened last june. you know, it's something we have to tell you about because it is a headline in the "new york times." what do you think? do you even care? something you probably do care about is immigration.
>> he says it's fake news. let's move on to talk something that you call care about, that's the wall and keeping america safe. >> a couple hours after that, trump tv went ahead and proceeded to walk back its own reporting. >> i'm told that the president never told mcgahn to fire mueller and mcgahn never threatened to quit over it. there's obviously some competing stories here. >> joining me now former breitbart news spokesman and newly meaned democrat kurt bardella. what do you make that have when you watch that? >> you know, first of all, ed henry was in the position where he confirmed on the air he heard these stories were true, he reported it essentially. he's at his own network and other reporters are undermining him. that's how far the right-hand couldn't know what the far right-hand is doing over there. >> or over written by the political imperative. i don't have any special
knowledge. >> there used to be a semblance of the line between the news commentary side and be journalism side. >> i think that was always quite permeable. >> they've gone from the fair and balanced moniker to now so far to the right. they make breitbart look sane. it used to be the breitbart crowd were the conspiracy theory, didn't care about any standards and now fox news has completely replaced that. the reason why there's no void with steve bannon going down, because fox news took that over a long time ago. >> there's this thing that happens where it's been sort of fascinating watch them deal with all this. there is an entire kind of universe being created over there and not just there and breitbart and other parts of the allied media that has this kind of impermeability to the outside world. i'm wondering as someone who obviously used to operate in that universe how does that operate on people who obviously
work in republican politics? >> well, i think one of the big things that's changed is again before, there was at least some semblance of some part of the fact being told on fox news. there was legitimate discussion whether it's public policy, immigration, issues that republicans by and large talk about, think about all day. now, it's so far removed from -- i have republicans tell me they don't watch fox news anymore. they want to know what's going on and he had can't watch that to be informed or else they'll go on tv and repeating something they reported and sounding like idiots. >> which appeared to happen with ron johnson with the secret society text which he had to walk back. i want to show you the way fox approaches mueller to begin with. they themselves have been calling for him to fire mueller all along. take a look what hannity had to say back in june. >> mueller needs to be removed.
mueller's relationship may violate two federal laws. this is beyond ridiculous and another reason why this special counsel, mueller needs to be shut down immediately. >> the acting attorney general who obviously appointed mueller should fire him because he has a glaring conflict of interest. >> special counsel mueller's investigation mission creep i've been telling you about. it's now turned into an out-of-control what is a political witch luhunt. he should recuse himself. he's incapable of carrying out a fair and impartial investigation. >> you have to wonder the degree to which the president himself thought about doing it from watching that. >> you can measure the president's tweets with what's on fox news program package. there's a direct symbiosis there. the crazy thing here is sean said this should happen. trump gave the order. then he goes on tv to say what does it matter. it was your idea in the first place. you're the one saying it should
happen. >> what i find interesting is i'm surprised the tactic they've gone with is to deny it happening when they could say he had every right to and he thought about it and didn't. but instead they seem to be fighting the facts. >> i'm shocked the thing sean didn't do was say i'm glad he took my advice last year. >> wait 24 hours. kurt, that, for being with me. coming up, the finance chief for the republican party, one of the trump's billionaire benefactors faces multiple allegations of sexual misconduct. the details coming up. we can do this. at fidelity, our online planning tools are clear and straightforward so you can plan for retirement while saving for the things you want to do today. -whoo!
today due to allegation afc sexual misconduct. it is congressman patrick meehan following "the new york times" report he settled a complaint of a former aide last year using his congressional office fund. meehan who obviously led a house ethics committee panel on sexual harassment denied an hassling the aide describing her as a soul mate. he is now the eighth member of congress to either resign or announce they will not run for re-election in the wake of accusations of appropriate conduct. another me too story today, "the new york times" reporting in 2008, hillary clinton retained her campaign spiritual adviser after evers accused of harassment. quoting the times, her clinton manager at the time recommended she fire the adviser bern strider but she did not. instead, mr. strider was docked several weeks of pay and order odd undergo counseling and the young woman moved to a new job. then there is more on this front today because arguably, the most powerful republican party donor
in the country, steve wynn, is being accused of sexual misconduct over several decades in a story that has 150 sources according to "the wall street journal." the casino magnate and finance chair of the republican national committee had this to say about candidate donald trump weeks before the election. >> it seems to me on the subject of the presidential sexual contact behavior, na being oversexed seems to be a qualification for a president the past two generations. this discussion of the sex lives of our politicians is a distraction. >> that's next. k at the mercedes-benz glc... with its high-tech cameras and radar, contemporary cockpit, 360 degree network of driver-assist technologies and sporty performance what's most impressive about the glc? all depends on your point of view. lease the glc300 for $449 a month at your local mercedes-benz dealer.
so, howell...going? we had a vacation early in our marriage that kinda put us in a hole. go someplace exotic? yeah, bermuda. a hospital in bermuda. a hospital in bermuda. what? what happened? i got a little over-confident on a moped. even with insurance, we had to dip into our 401(k) so it set us back a little bit. sometimes you don't have a choice. but it doesn't mean you can't get back on track. great. yeah, great. i'd like to go back to bermuda. i hear it's nice. yeah, i'd like to see it. no judgment. just guidance. td ameritrade. patients that i see about dry mouth. they feel that they have to drink a lot of water. medications seem to be the number one cause for dry mouth. i like to recommend biotene. it replenishes the moisture in your mouth.
during the celebrity cruises sail beyond event. and another great friend of mine somebody respected by everybody, a great friend of phil too, mr. and mrs. steve wynn. stand up, steve. stand up. steve is always calling. he's always got advice, right, steve? donald i think you ought to do there and that. his advice i like to listen to. i'll be honest with you. >> steve wib is a billerica sin nomo gull as well as the current finance chairman of the republican national committee. he's the vice chair of president trump's inaugural committee and co-host of the president's big mir lag doe anniversary party and fund-raiser. now he stands accused of sexual misconduct in a comprehensive report by "the wall street journal" which contacted more than 150 current and forrer employees "dozens of people "the wall street journal" interviewed who obviously have worked at mr. wip's casinos told of
behavior that would amount to a decades long pattern of sexual misconduct by mr. wynn. some described him pressuring employees to perform sex acts. in one case according to the journal, he paid out a $7.5 million settlement to a manicurist who obviously accused him of forcing her to have sex back in 2005." wynn has debbed the accusations in a statement reading in spart "the idea that i ever assaulted any woman is preprosperous." "the washington post" reports he has no immediate plans to relinquish his rowe as finance chairman. a reminder the republican uproar over contributions to democrats by harvey weinstein included this admonition from reason na mcdaniel. if the dnc truly stands up for women like they say they do, then returning weinstein's money should be a no-brainer. mcdaniel was one confident co-hosts of the mar-a-lago bash with steve wynn last weekend. the rnc has not yet responded to all in's response for comment. jon ralston is the editor of the
nevada independent. did you see this coming? >> i wouldn't say i saw it coming. but there have been rumors about the casino industry for a long, long time. i think "the wall street journal," i heard weeks ago they were looking into sexual harassment in the casino industry. one of my columnists john l. smith has written about steve wynn. he wrote a book about him. there were some allegations. there's a lawsuit that the "wall street journal" mentioned with dennis gomes a former employee when he said i'm not going to be his pimp or words to that effect. this is an incredibly well reported, well researched story, 150 people, the $7.5 million that you mentioned really stands out. so they obviously took their time with this. >> talk about his relationship with donald trump because trump doesn't have a ton of folks that -- he's got a huge social
circle, lots of acquaintances but in the world of donald trump, he and wynn were relatively close. >> you know, it's interesting are, chris, because way back 20, 30 years ago, they hated each other. they were competitors in atlantic city. there were lawsuits. they did not like each other. i remember one of the first columns i ever wrote as a journalist started with steve wynn is bookkeeping the donald trump of the west. and it was not meant as a compliment and he didn't take it that way. but then they had a rapprochement of sorts over the years and became friendly. i talked to steve wynn when the donald trump for president rumors were just starting. he seemed to believe it was not for real. when it was, he certainly took advantage of it because unlike donald trump, steve wynn is truly a brilliant guy and i'm sure he did have a lot of advice for trump and embraced the whole thing because who obviously wouldn't. you have access to the president
of the united states. same reason sheldon adelson, another billionaire who obviously lives not far from here, chris, embraced donald trump. >> he has had a political trajectory wynn, in the past sort of divided his donations. he gave to democrats and republicans. post obama, he became a very kind of republican conservative figure. he's given money to marco rubio and rob portman, pat toomey, ted cruz, lisa murkowski. donated more than 2 million to party campaigns since 2001 including $1.3 million to rnc bundled for senator john mccain's presidential campaign, as well. is he a big deal in the donor world of republican politics. >> he's become bigger and bigger. a switch flipped with steve wynn shortly after obama was elected, chris. i remember several conversations with him in which had he became increasingly vitriolic about the president who i believe actually i think he voted for him.
i think his wife at the time elaine talked him into voting for obama. he had buyer's remorse almost immediately said he was creating the worst business client in the history of the world and thought the affordable care act was the worst bill ever passed but it's gotten increasingly more and more intense. he's become more and more republican. sheldon adelson who obviously i mentioned earlier has always been a major republican donor. he and steve wynn also did not like each other but bonded over obama. i think sheldon adelson helped get steve wynn into the major republican donor column. if i may chris, the point you made about him being the republican national committee's finance chair now and all those pictures with donald trump and the things he said about donald trump, it's not like the republican national committee like wynn resorts as a board of directors where they can vote steve wynn out of that job. only one person can tell steve wynn not to be the republican finance chair anymore. it's not the chairwoman of the
rnc. it's the guy at 1600 pennsylvania. >> yeah, and we still radio silence from the rnc so far. the stock price. this paints a picture of a pretty awful pattern and some truly had vial acts there. you should read thatter to. obviously, wynn has issued his own denial. jon ralston, thank you very much. still to cop, a republican cosponsor of a bill to protect robert mueller from donald trump is now changing his tune. plus, the president has the best memory primarily when it comes to telling you when he has the best memory. thing 1, thing 2 starts next. i was wondering if an electric toothbrush really cleans better
than a manual. and my hygienist says it does but they're not all the same. who knew? i had no idea. so she said, look for one that's shaped like a dental tool with a round brush head. go pro with oral-b. oral-b's rounded brush head surrounds each tooth to gently remove more plaque. and unlike sonicare, oral-b is the only electric toothbrush brand accepted by the american dental association for its effectiveness and safety. my mouth feels so clean. i'll only use an oral-b. oral-b. brush like a pro. thing 1 tonight, donald trump is suffering from memory loss and i don't mean that time at mar-a-lago when he failed to recognize a succession of old friends as michael wolff rorred about i'm talking how he can't remember key details related
into the investigation into russian collusion and obstruction of justice. for instance, does he remember what happened at the march 2016 meeting where a campaign adviser george papadopoulos says he offered to arrange a meeting between trump and russian president putin? >> i don't remember much about that meeting. it was a very unimportant meeting. took place a long time. don't remember much about it. >> how about the february 2017 meeting when the president allegedly asked james comey to drop the investigation into michael flynn? >> did you actually have a one-on-one with comey then. >> not much. not even that i remember. he was sitting, and i don't remember even talking to him about any of this stuff. >> after firing comey, did trump pressure then acting fbi director andrew mccabe to tell him who obviously he voted for in the election? >> did you ask mccabe who obviously he voted for. >> no, i don't think i did. i don't know what's the big deal with that because i would ask you, who obviously did you vote for? i don't think it's a big deal.
but i don't remember that -- i saw that this morning. i don't remember asking him that question. >> is it possible you did. >> i don't remember asking him the question. i think it's also a very unimportant question but i don't remember asking him that question. >> it was fine if i did it but i don't remember doing it. this is nothing new. his selective amnesia when he gets into legal trouble is thing 2g in 60 seconds. when you combine ancestry's dna test with its historical records... ...you could learn you're from ireland... ...donegal, ireland... ...and your ancestor was a fisherman. with blue eyes.
just like you. begin your journey at ancestry.com do you want the same tools and seamless experience across web and tablet? yes? great! then you're ready for power e*trade. the platform, price and service that gives you the edge you need. sweet! e*trade. the original place to invest online. it's one of donald trump's favorite boasts. >> i don't have teleprompt teres here, folks. i don't need teleprompters. it's called up here and it's called memory and it's called other things. i have a good memory and all that stuff, like a great memory. i have a really good memory. i have a good memory like a great memory. i have a great memory. i'm blessed with a great memory. one of the great memories of all time. >> but a funny thing happens when he gets in front of a lawyer. his great memory suddenly fails. for example, there were 35 times he said he didn't remember during a deposition in the trump
university lawsuit? december 2015 and the 24 times he said in a separate trump university lawsuit deposition in 2012, not to mention the time he couldn't remember how he boasted about his excellent memory. quoting from his december 25th transcript lawyer, do you believe you have one of the best memories in the world? trump, that i can't tell you. i can't tell for other people but i have a good memory. lawyer, you stated though that you have one of the best memories in the world. trump, i don't know. did i use that expression? >> i got a phone call directly from mr. trump himself. i can tell you that's never happened before. he says he has, and i quote the world's best merle and that everybody knows that. >> one of the great memories of all time. >> i have a very great memory. >> it's called like up here and it's called memory and it's called other things. oh, the things we do to get ahead. rising before dawn. sweating it out. driving ourselves to do more. be more. tough to make time for it all. but we can always find time to listen. to great thinkers, and fearless explorers.
whose stories fuel our minds... and imaginations. stories that take us places our hamstrings alone can't. all we have to do is listen. open your ears to the largest selection of audiobooks from the world's most inspiring voices. download audible today. there are 7 continents. 7 seas. but at celebrity cruises we'd argue,
more than 7 wonders. for a limited time, enjoy two free perks like complimentary wifi and drinks, plus savings for everyone in your stateroom, when you book now. during the celebrity cruises sail beyond event. today we learned the u.s. economy grew in its first year under donald trump just maybe not as much as the president might have you believe.
the economy actually added fewer jobs last year than any year since 2010. this chart showing gdp growth since 2009 makes it clear the economy has been steadily growing for years. in fact, if you zoom in there, it's tough to pinpoint just where exactly the trump economics kicked in. there's nothing unusual about presidents taking credit for a growing economy regardless of the president's rereal impact. it's what they all do. somewhat straeng ser how corporations are playing along like for instance the ceo of the german conglomerate siemens yesterday in davos. >> doing good. >> doing excellent as a matter of fact. we're investing quite a lot into the country and seem to have been successful with the tax reform, we decided to develop the next generation in the united states. >> that's a big thing. that's very big. >> it is. >> where will that be developed? >> siemens ceo there said i'm quoting him again here, since
have you been successful with tax reform, we decided to develop next generation gas turbines in the united states. this got us curious. we reached out to ask about the turbine project. company e-mailed a press release dated back in august. august of course, would be before any republican tax plan existed announcing the turbine project, the same project the ceo now appears to credit to the passage of tax reform. in that meeting, he neglected to mention the layoffs in iowa as per "usa today." but see mens is hardly alone in bathing ruch in the glory he seeks. the ceo of walmart tied her round of wage hikes to the tax plan but they had already raised wages twice once in 2015 when president obama was president and then in 2016 when president obama was president. as some economists at the council on foreign relations put it, those raises aren't tied to politics but to the broader economy adding but that makes for crummy pr.
much better to share credit with lawmakers who obviously cuts your taxes. gebs them motivation to keep the goodies coming. kimberly clark announced a very different plan. on a recent call, the company admitted their windfall from the corporate tax cut will be used to fund their company's plan to lay off around 5,000 people. yes, you heard that right. credit where it's due at least they were honest. i've seen wonders all around the world but what i see here never ceases to amaze me: change.
when there was talk last year donald trump was thinking about tifiring mueller, some republicans were set against it. >> what would that mean if the president fired the special counsel? >> that would be a mistake. >> there was a significauggesti white house would release him. what would your advice be if that suggestion came up? >> any effort to go after mueller could be the beginning of the end of the trump presidency. >> to protect against that possibility. lindsey graham co-sponsored a bill with booker that would mandate any special counsel to establish any staff member can't be fired unless they have reviewing. there was a senate bill looking to detour trump from firing mueller. >> there seems to be some belief and certainly is backed inby
what s -- up by what senator can said about his reaction about robert mueller's investigation. >> that's right. that's why we put the effective date back to the date of the hire special counsel. >> here is the thing, now that we learned trump did actually try to fire mueller, he ordered the firing, tillis is backing off and no longer working to advance his legislation. the bill doesn't have support to go through congress and continues to trust the president isn't planning to fire mueller. with me is congressman ted lou who we have in new york city and reporter for "the daily beast." what is the ration of tillis' office? >> they gave me two reasons why they aren't trying to move the
sl legislation forward. they support the idea of ultimately making this legislation law but don't think it's urgent and aren't engaged in efforts to move the ball forward, they trust president trump isn't going to fire mueller. the spokesperson said he didn't think there was currently enough support in congress to get legislation like this passed. i'll leave it to viewers which they think is more likely, whether trump would fire mueller or this bill would get through congress. that's the explanation team tillis is giving for why they put efforts to move this forward on ice. >> a party line person, that's in the senate. in the house, you have legislation i think to protect mueller, am i right?
>> i'm a co-author of legislation that would transfer the authority to remove the special counsel to a panel of three judges. so far only democrats supporting it. we don't have republicans in the house. >> are there any republicans signed on to any legislation in the house? >> no, i do think it's important. >> zero. >> zero. >> what is more important than the legislation and letting robert mueller complete the investigation and if trump got him removed, people would take to the streets. >> is it your understanding that the reason that mcgahn short of threw himself in front of this according to reporting has to do with that? do you think that's the check that bound it so far? >> i think mcgahn saw what happened in watergate and wasn't going to be part of that. keep in mind, he wasn't involved
in the coverup. he puts himself at legal jeopardy and keep in mind, not only did mcgahn resign, deputy attorney general rosenstein would have to resign because he wasn't going to fire mueller and put in associate attorney general rachel brant who is an up standing person. >> a lot of people fired. >> you think it would have gone through the entire thing? >> absolutely. like the saturday night massacre 2.0 squared. >> one thing that jumped out from the mcgahn story in terms of ways of binding this situation is mcgahn threat to quit and it seems like that's something people have used quitefequite effectively with the president. don mcgahn threatening to quit and christopher wray threatening to quit. is that something that's a tool in a tool kit for those seeking to stop the president from doing something like firing mull snem?
>> it's a good question. to be clear, senor level ocior officials have a resignation letter on hand in case they reach a situation that is so fraud and frustrating that they feel they need to break out that threat. so it's certainly not unique to this administration. this is something we see folks in the executive branch always sort of keeping on hand as a way to push back against presidents they believe are over stepping bounds. that said, of course, the number of public reports indicating that senior level officials has sort of used this tactic to push back is significant. when we talk about push back is one figure that's flown under the radar and that is ty cob. when trump reportedly threatened to fire mueller, that came in june. shortly after that, ty cob stepped on and in the time he's been the top in house lawyer, we
seen a complete 180 as far as how the white house talks about the mueller probe. that's very much due to him. he's been an under the radar figure whose actually quietly shown a lot of influence. >> do you think, do you trust that that lawyer can restrain his client as a president of the united states? >> i think the larger -- >> i don't. to inquire people threatening to resign because there is a pattern of obstruction of justice. donald trump tried to get michael flynn's investigation dropped and fired the fbi director and tried to fire the deputy fbi director and tried to get his own attorney general to resign and tried to get robert mueller fired. this is a pattern and a prosecutor would be able to prosecute this case. >> do you have a sense this is coming to a head soon? >> i have a sense the special counsel's investigation will come to ahead.
trump lied over 2,000 times last year and he's going to go into an interview with fbi agents, if you lie once it's perjury. >> thank you both for joining us. "the rachel maddow show" starts now. joy reid in for rachel. >> thank you. thanks to you at home for joining us. rachel has the right off. earlier this month, a couple days into the new year, a very odd and dramatic thing happened in washington d.c. the deputy attorney general, rod rosenstein and fbi director christopher wray made an unannounced appearance and the deputy attorney general and fbi director requested the meeting. what made this unannounced meeting particularly dramatic was that at that moment, the justice deputy was in the middle of the this